Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: Determining spring rate [Re: Mopar Mitch] #2662279
06/04/19 02:55 PM
06/04/19 02:55 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,704
MICHIGAN
DynoDave Offline
master
DynoDave  Offline
master

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,704
MICHIGAN
Is the rate for the hollow front bar supposed to equal that of the solid one?

I think I read that somewhere... laugh2


DynoDave
Walter P. Chrysler Club - Great Lakes Region
Member # 12304
1970 Plymouth Duster
1972 Dodge Charger Rallye
https://wichargerguy.proboards.com/
1977 Chrysler Cordoba
Re: Determining spring rate [Re: DynoDave] #2662281
06/04/19 03:11 PM
06/04/19 03:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
J
jcc Offline
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
jcc  Offline
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
J

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
Theoretically that would not be possible with steel, unless there is, obvious to me, some other design change, like diameter, length of arms, etc


Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
Re: Determining spring rate [Re: DynoDave] #2662593
06/05/19 11:36 AM
06/05/19 11:36 AM
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,440
NW Chicago suburban area
Mopar Mitch Offline
pro stock
Mopar Mitch  Offline
pro stock

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,440
NW Chicago suburban area
As for the difference between solid vs hollow sway bars, I don't know the actual differences... the solid probably is a little stiffer. I've read somewhere that the hollow bar's main strength comes from the OD radial wall thickness... in other words the center of the bar (solid) doesn't have that much effect... its the OD wall thickness that matters the most.

IF I don't like the results of the hollow front sway bar, I'll put the solid bar back in.... probably a few exchanges will be needed for testing/comparison to make any conclusion. I do favor the weight reduction an important overall factor for the car's intentions of usage.

Last edited by Mopar Mitch; 06/05/19 11:38 AM.

Mopar Mitch "Road racers and autocrossers go in deeper and come out harder!"... and rain never stops us from having fun with our cars... in fact, it makes us better drivers! Check out MOPAR ACTION MAGAZINE, August 2006 issue for feature article and specs on my autocross T/A!
Re: Determining spring rate [Re: DynoDave] #2662704
06/05/19 03:50 PM
06/05/19 03:50 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
T
TC@HP2 Offline
master
TC@HP2  Offline
master
T

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
Originally Posted by jcc
Originally Posted by TC@HP2
...and these are simple free rate calculations. A spring's installed roll rate can also vary based on mounting layouts and shackle angles. For your Charger, with its parallel mounting, it is a good starting point as the splayed layouts are only found in Late B, E, F, J, and M bodies.

To figure out the wheel rate of leaf springs, you need the center to center distance of the axle housing mounting pad points and center to center of the tread width. Divide pad width by tread width, multiply by 100, that's your wheel rate.

Your rear anti-sway bar also contributes to wheel rate as well.


We have had this discussion before, but imo, in say hitting railroad tracks head on, the pad distance is not factor, spring rate is wheel rate, as both springs move the exact same amount as the wheel moves.. Where I disagree with the pad dimension factor, whatever one loses in rate with the pad not being directly over the center tire patch on a one wheel bump, one regains by the other leaf now being closer and it then makes up equally for what little was lost with the spring pad being mounted closer to the center. I am not addressing roll rates here, they are harder to calculate with an OEM mounted leaf, which has designed in anti roll properties already.


True and for your example of hitting an obstacle square, I'd say you are correct. But I think we would all agree getting into the gnats behind of calculations of roll rates is way more complex than what any of us here want or need to get in to. I do use the motion ratio wheel rates for my calculations simply because of the transient nature of handling is loading the springs differently on each turn. Even then its a simple ball park figure that may be adjusted up or down based on how the car feels to me, what the tire temps read, and what the stopwatch says.

Originally Posted by myduster360
Originally Posted by Frankenduster
I get that. The car is pretty neutral right now with some slight understeer. I'm fine with that. I am looking to build a similar car within a year or so and was thinking of having it a step or two softer. Again, it is easy enough to do with torsion bars and sway bars due to the diameters/lever arms but....


I used Direct Connection's "neutral handling" methodology to find my Swinger's needed rear leaf spring rate and its a decent starting point. You can do the same using your current car as a starting point since its "pretty neutral" handling is what you want to emulate only "softer".

1) Calculate your current cars Front roll couple. That value will represent 75%-80% the cars total roll stiffness. Thus the 20%-25% remaining will be the range of your CURRENT car's rear roll couple. I'm guessing if you back calculate the leaf spring rate, your MP XHD may be in the range of 110-140 lb/in

2) Now substitute in "softer" TB redo the calcs and see what the rear leafs you'd need. Just error on the side of too soft because a rear bar can bridge the gap and bump up the rear roll couple.


Agree this info provides a good starting point but would remind other readers it is not a set in stone set of values. The neutral handling line was developed from sanctioned competition cars with specific limitations on tire size, overall weight, and biased weight. Street cars can have a much greater variety of variables and a wider range of these variables that can impact where this neutral point occurs.

I'd also add, because of the limited number of torsion bars and sway bars, anyone doing this work should dial in what they want for front rates and then build the rear to compliment it. It much cheaper and easier to modify leaf spring packs for rate than it is to get a custom t-bar size made. T-bars are also limited by the socket size on most of cars to be no more than 1.24, max, unless you are energetic enough to convert ABE bodies to C body sockets, ala the original SCCA TA series race cars.

Originally Posted by jbeintherockies
Why no mention of sway bars?

Instead of running a really stiff spring rate on the street, why not run a softer spring rate and stiff sway bars?


This is possible to a degree. With a street car you still need to have adequate spring rates to prevent bottoming out on features you encounter with regular street driving, which will still necessitate a step or three up from stock. But, this is still part of a larger calculation of roll couple, mentioned higher up, that needs to be maintained. You need heavy enough springs rates to support the car, then use the sway bars to tune its turning characteristics.

The popular soft spring/ big bar set up in modern nascar is actually softer than most stock rates and are used on a smooth surface to allow wind resistance to actually push the car down closer to the ground. Set ups of this type are not practical for the street and require way more shock control than most of us would be willing to pay for.

Originally Posted by DynoDave
Is the rate for the hollow front bar supposed to equal that of the solid one?

I think I read that somewhere... laugh2


Again, a more complex question in simple clothes with a wide range of "it depends" in the middle. In simple terms, two identical diameter sways bars, one solid, one hollow, will find the solid bar producing more rate. For a hollow bar to produce equal rate requires its overall diameter go up and/or its wall thickness to increase. For example, the popular 1.125" solid bar replaced by a 1.375" diameter, .25" wall tubular bar of identical configuration will have nearly identical rates. But in this case, the hollow bar may weigh 8-10 pounds less. Its increased diameter can also create installation problems for some k frame configurations that require some modifications.

Bar configuration and mounting has a profound impact on its applied rate. The diameter is only one of several variables that impact how much force it applies to a wheel. Looking at calculations I've done, I've found that a solid .75" factory frame hung bar applies almost as much wheel rate as many aftermarket solid .875" axle hung bars because of the variety of factors that may include not only diameter, but also lever arm length, axle mounting position, frame mounting position, resistance width, lever arm mounting angle, and link length.

Re: Determining spring rate [Re: TC@HP2] #2662785
06/05/19 07:16 PM
06/05/19 07:16 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,704
MICHIGAN
DynoDave Offline
master
DynoDave  Offline
master

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,704
MICHIGAN
Originally Posted by Mopar Mitch
I've read somewhere that the hollow bar's main strength comes from the OD radial wall thickness... in other words the center of the bar (solid) doesn't have that much effect... its the OD wall thickness that matters the most.


Yep, that's what I was recalling as well.



Originally Posted by TC@HP2
Again, a more complex question in simple clothes with a wide range of "it depends" in the middle.


That's my specialty! laugh2


DynoDave
Walter P. Chrysler Club - Great Lakes Region
Member # 12304
1970 Plymouth Duster
1972 Dodge Charger Rallye
https://wichargerguy.proboards.com/
1977 Chrysler Cordoba
Re: Determining spring rate [Re: TC@HP2] #2665992
06/14/19 09:04 PM
06/14/19 09:04 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 350
central IL
M
myduster360 Offline
enthusiast
myduster360  Offline
enthusiast
M

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 350
central IL
Originally Posted by TC@HP2

Originally Posted by myduster360
Originally Posted by Frankenduster
I get that. The car is pretty neutral right now with some slight understeer. I'm fine with that. I am looking to build a similar car within a year or so and was thinking of having it a step or two softer. Again, it is easy enough to do with torsion bars and sway bars due to the diameters/lever arms but....


I used Direct Connection's "neutral handling" methodology to find my Swinger's needed rear leaf spring rate and its a decent starting point. You can do the same using your current car as a starting point since its "pretty neutral" handling is what you want to emulate only "softer".

1) Calculate your current cars Front roll couple. That value will represent 75%-80% the cars total roll stiffness. Thus the 20%-25% remaining will be the range of your CURRENT car's rear roll couple. I'm guessing if you back calculate the leaf spring rate, your MP XHD may be in the range of 110-140 lb/in

2) Now substitute in "softer" TB redo the calcs and see what the rear leafs you'd need. Just error on the side of too soft because a rear bar can bridge the gap and bump up the rear roll couple.


Agree this info provides a good starting point but would remind other readers it is not a set in stone set of values. The neutral handling line was developed from sanctioned competition cars with specific limitations on tire size, overall weight, and biased weight. Street cars can have a much greater variety of variables and a wider range of these variables that can impact where this neutral point occurs.

I'd also add, because of the limited number of torsion bars and sway bars, anyone doing this work should dial in what they want for front rates and then build the rear to compliment it. It much cheaper and easier to modify leaf spring packs for rate than it is to get a custom t-bar size made. T-bars are also limited by the socket size on most of cars to be no more than 1.24, max, unless you are energetic enough to convert ABE bodies to C body sockets, ala the original SCCA TA series race cars.



Ok so the alternative being either
1) Random A$$ Guess
or
2) Rock solid methodology of intrawebs opinion poll??

Seems they'd have far more caveats, what-ifs and could-bees, than using actual data derived from a real vehicle.


1972 Swinger 3.6L Pentastar
Diablo CMR tuner
Re: Determining spring rate [Re: myduster360] #2666277
06/15/19 06:59 PM
06/15/19 06:59 PM
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 6,174
nowhere
S
Sniper Offline
master
Sniper  Offline
master
S

Joined: May 2019
Posts: 6,174
nowhere
At any Nascar race you care to name you will have a grid or 40-50 cars racing.

With 40-50 different suspension setups.

That is because even though they are about as identical as Nascar can mandate each driver likes a different setup.

Nobody can tell you what you will like, all we can do it tell you how to figure out what you like and what works for you.

Re: Determining spring rate [Re: myduster360] #2666977
06/17/19 06:42 PM
06/17/19 06:42 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
T
TC@HP2 Offline
master
TC@HP2  Offline
master
T

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,385
Pikes Peak Country
Originally Posted by myduster360
Originally Posted by TC@HP2

Originally Posted by myduster360
Originally Posted by Frankenduster
I get that. The car is pretty neutral right now with some slight understeer. I'm fine with that. I am looking to build a similar car within a year or so and was thinking of having it a step or two softer. Again, it is easy enough to do with torsion bars and sway bars due to the diameters/lever arms but....


I used Direct Connection's "neutral handling" methodology to find my Swinger's needed rear leaf spring rate and its a decent starting point. You can do the same using your current car as a starting point since its "pretty neutral" handling is what you want to emulate only "softer".

1) Calculate your current cars Front roll couple. That value will represent 75%-80% the cars total roll stiffness. Thus the 20%-25% remaining will be the range of your CURRENT car's rear roll couple. I'm guessing if you back calculate the leaf spring rate, your MP XHD may be in the range of 110-140 lb/in

2) Now substitute in "softer" TB redo the calcs and see what the rear leafs you'd need. Just error on the side of too soft because a rear bar can bridge the gap and bump up the rear roll couple.


Agree this info provides a good starting point but would remind other readers it is not a set in stone set of values. The neutral handling line was developed from sanctioned competition cars with specific limitations on tire size, overall weight, and biased weight. Street cars can have a much greater variety of variables and a wider range of these variables that can impact where this neutral point occurs.

I'd also add, because of the limited number of torsion bars and sway bars, anyone doing this work should dial in what they want for front rates and then build the rear to compliment it. It much cheaper and easier to modify leaf spring packs for rate than it is to get a custom t-bar size made. T-bars are also limited by the socket size on most of cars to be no more than 1.24, max, unless you are energetic enough to convert ABE bodies to C body sockets, ala the original SCCA TA series race cars.



Ok so the alternative being either
1) Random A$$ Guess
or
2) Rock solid methodology of intrawebs opinion poll??

Seems they'd have far more caveats, what-ifs and could-bees, than using actual data derived from a real vehicle.


I'm not saying don't use the neutral handling line. It is a great starting point. What I'm saying don't be surprised if using it does not immediately produce the desired results because street cars have more variables to contend with.

Re: Determining spring rate [Re: TC@HP2] #2668140
06/20/19 09:37 PM
06/20/19 09:37 PM
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,645
Phila. Pa.
Mattax Offline
top fuel
Mattax  Offline
top fuel

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,645
Phila. Pa.
Yup.
pretty much spell that out on the webpage where I go step by step on how I used it.
up

Page 2 of 2 1 2






Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1